https://cases.justia.com/indiana/supreme-co...f?ts=1518629542
The Indiana Supreme Court holds in Gunderson V. State of Indiana department of Natural Resources, that:
A century ago, our Court of Appeals recognized that, among those rights acquired upon
admission to the Union, the State owns and holds “in trust” the lands under navigable waters within
its borders, “including the shores or space between ordinary high and low water marks, for the
benefit of the people of the state.
Indiana “in its sovereign capacity is without power to convey or curtail the right of its people in the bed of
Lake Michigan.”
This Court has since affirmed these principles.
"We conclude that, with the exception of select parcels of land not in dispute here,
Indiana has not relinquished its title to the shores and submerged lands of Lake Michigan.
a.Absent an authorized legislative conveyance, Indiana may not relinquish its
public trust lands. "
"At a minimum, walking along the Lake Michigan shore is a protected activity inherent in the exercise of traditional public trust rights."
There is a lot of legal gobble-de-gook in this opinion, but basically it says that a property owner does not own the land to the lake shore but only to the normal "high water mark." This leaves the beach open for public use, even if it is in front of his lake-shore home.
Plaintiff Gunderson, who used to live at stop 22 was locally famous for chasing people off "His Beach." He has since sold the property but maintains that his ownership and that of other shore side homeowners owned the property to the water line and could prevent anyone from gaining access to that area.
The court holds otherwise. I think this will be a bid disappointment to folks from Chicago, many of whom thought that via a win in this case they would have a huge increase in home value because their beach was effectively and legally private.